In today's Q1 Earnings Conference Call, JetBlue CEO/President Robin Hayes was asked a question about apparent flexibility with cash that the airline has showed through their interest in VX.
Article by Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ders-buying-long-range-airbus-a321
Hayes mentioned the fact that they've expressed interest and are looking at the A321LR carefully. He was also asked by the same analyst what the future holds for widebodies at B6. Hayes said that widebodies are further down the road and then redirected that he thinks that A321LR is their primary focus for expansion (primarily through JFK/BOS). Marty St. George, I believe, mentioned the fact that any A321LR flights would likely feature Mint.
With the pretty constant mention of the A321LR by B6's executive team, would B6 consider an order soon?
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
I'm guessing by the Paris air show an order would be made.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
It isn't a matter of "if" but when B6 will expand to longer routes once the A321LRs arrive. If B6 were to merge; who would be a right fit? ULCC NK has a totally different product and an infamous brand...
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 2): It isn't a matter of "if" but when B6 will expand to longer routes once the A321LRs arrive. If B6 were to merge; who would be a right fit? ULCC NK has a totally different product and an infamous brand... |
There aren't many candidates left. AS will be tied up with the VX integration for the next 3-5years, so if B6 wants to merge with someone before that point then my money is on HA. A330 operational knowledge, and help solidify any west coast presence B6 tries to build in the future. The might work if B6 can create a holding company to buy HA and operate as a separate brand for the short/medium term.
Long term I'd like to see B6+HA and then B6/HA+AS.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
I stated this on the B6 earnings thread, but I'll post here as well. Why would B6 want to start transAtlantic? It seems the more internationally focused a US carrier is, the worse their results. B6 is doing a good job at what they do, and I don't see the point of trying to please all the people all the time. They probably meet the needs of 80% of the eastern seaboard, so why bother?
-
-
lightsaber
Moderator
- Posts: 24641
- Joined:
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
Someone will fly A321LRs TATL. From BOS, DUB, EWR/JFK, and maybe MAN as the hubs.
They could fly Ireland, UK, the Baltic, Western half of Germany, Western half of France, and most of Spain.
B6 will have a much more flexible fleet. The same plane will be profitable BOS-Westcoast. B6 does well to carribean and South America. This extends their range.
Lightsaber
| Quoting 321neo (Reply 4): Longer routes...to where? Ireland/UK, Latam? |
They could fly Ireland, UK, the Baltic, Western half of Germany, Western half of France, and most of Spain.
| Quoting Prost (Reply 5): ? It seems the more internationally focused a US carrier is, the worse their results. |
B6 will have a much more flexible fleet. The same plane will be profitable BOS-Westcoast. B6 does well to carribean and South America. This extends their range.
Lightsaber
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting flyby519 (Reply 3): and help solidify any west coast presence B6 tries to build in the future. |
Not really sure how significantly though. HA doesn't have an intra-WestCoast presence, and there's not much they don't offer that B6 couldn't create organically.
| Quoting Prost (Reply 5): It seems the more internationally focused a US carrier is, the worse their results. |
In a vacuum sure, but there's been plenty of points in recent history where the exact opposite were true.
That said, they're already flying 5-6hr segments.
What's adding another hour or two (for an Ireland/UK) jaunt going to hurt?
-
- FirstClass
- Posts: 110
- Joined:
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
This may sound a bit far fetched but they could also expand further south into Brazil - Orlando or Fort Lauderdale to Fortaleza or Belem and codeshare with Azul. After all the two companies have a special relationship and Azul is already doing well in Florida ...
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
As a Brit who knows nothing about the Airline.Is there a reason Jet Blue does not connect with major destinations in Canada?
This year will be a Farnborouh-year starting from July 18.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting lightsaber (Reply 7): This extends their range. |
Would they be able to reach the likes of EZE MVD GIG or GRU from SJU with the A321neoLR?
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting cessna53996 (Thread starter): any A321LR flights would likely feature Mint. |
I'm not familiar with the airline. What is "Mint"?
-
- einsteinboricua
- Posts: 8832
- Joined:
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting flyby519 (Reply 3): |
Why would B6 merge (or team up) with HA? What does B6 gain from HA other than presence in Hawaii and space on western airports? I'd see this coming to fruition when (if) B6 starts a TATL venture. Then it can join with HA for a TPAC network (though having to connect through three airports to go from Europe to Asia or viceversa is not exactly wise).
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 8): Not really sure how significantly though. HA doesn't have an intra-WestCoast presence, and there's not much they don't offer that B6 couldn't create organically. |
Yea it definitely isn't as strong of a candidate as VX or even pmAS was. I figure the biggest reason for B6+HA would be to eliminate competition like AS did with VX. If B6 wanted to jump into the mainland-Hawaii markets then they would get slaughtered by HA.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting trent1000 (Reply 13): I'm not familiar with the airline. What is "Mint"? |
Mint is what they call their lie-flat premium class. It is only on select A321s (primarily on transcon flights):
http://www.jetblue.com/flying-on-jetblue/mint/
| Quoting flyby519 (Reply 15): If B6 wanted to jump into the mainland-Hawaii markets then they would get slaughtered by HA. |
Like HA slaughtered AS? HA's fleet makes it hard to dominate Mainland-Hawaii traffic, although they are getting A321neos starting next year. Their lack of intra-mainland network also doesn't help.
HA and B6 are already partners though- B6 really doesn't need to perform an all out assault to Hawaii.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting Stitch (Reply 6): If they do it small-scale and prudently, they could probably make it work. |
If they do it small scale they don't get economies of scale - and they would be competing TATL and S America against carriers with big economies of scale. B6 is a relatively small carrier. Too many subfleets - A320, E190, Mint, A321LR - will be costly to manage. The degree of commonality of the 321LR to other types would be very important. A339s or 787s open up most everything from JFK/BOS/FLL - but that's a very different game, not just a little imcremental range.
-
- 747megatop
- Posts: 2053
- Joined:
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting Prost (Reply 5): Why would B6 want to start transAtlantic? It seems the more internationally focused a US carrier is, the worse their results. |
But, given their quality of product hopefully they will attract customers and be able to break the norm thereby going TATL and having good results. To start with; I don't see why they shouldn't try it out of JFK and start with some kind of specialized service that attracts business clientele to some of the business centers accross the pond.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting 321neo (Reply 4): Longer routes...to where? Ireland/UK, Latam? |
All of the above plus most of Western Europe, and West/North Africa. Think LIS, BCN, CDG, CMN, DKR, ALG, from JFK.
| Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 8): That said, they're already flying 5-6hr segments. What's adding another hour or two (for an Ireland/UK) jaunt going to hurt? |
LAX and SFO are often close to 7 hours.RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting Stitch (Reply 6): I stated this on the B6 earnings thread, but I'll post here as well. Why would B6 want to start transAtlantic? It seems the more internationally focused a US carrier is, the worse their results. B6 is doing a good job at what they do, and I don't see the point of trying to please all the people all the time. They probably meet the needs of 80% of the eastern seaboard, so why bother? |
Because there is a semi monopoly of the transatlantic routes now in the US with the big 3 US legacy airlines as compared to several years ago there were 6. The market could totally benefit from B6 with their great product and bases in high International O&D markets. So why not?
Also not sure we're the fact that "international focus the worse the results" all the big 3 international markets are their bread and butter. And just cause they will venture over the pond is not so much a "focus" but a strategic way to being in high yeild revenues with a lower cost structure. They also have about 25% of their capacity in international markets and they did just fine since they started international back in 2004.
I think it's the next obvious evolutionary step for B6.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting Abeam79 (Reply 20): Because there is a semi monopoly of the transatlantic routes now |
There is no monopoly.
There is no "semi-monopoly," whatever the heck that's supposed to mean.
There's only more pax flying to more destinations than ever before, at adjusted real prices that are lower now than they were 40yrs ago.
Thus, can we please be finished with such ridiculous and nonsensical language?
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting lightsaber (Reply 7): Someone will fly A321LRs TATL |
TP has plans to do so from LIS.
B6 would have to start with JFK/BOS-LGW/CDG I suppose though they may get beat by DY to other second/third tier destinations.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
I think the 321LR would be the absolute best bet for B6 international expansion, with a much lower risk than a widebody. If it doesn't work out, then they still have 321 equivalents they can just put on domestic routes, probably with a Mint configuration all ready to go.
While Europe is sort of the obvious answer, I'm rather curious of what Latin America potential there could be from FLL with the 321LR that a simple Neo wouldn't cover. Only things that come to mind are REC and BSB. I wouldn't put much hope in either of those given that they're being cut by AA and DL respectively. Everything else is either out of reach of the LR or within reach of a normal Neo.
Aside from that, I do wonder if there could be SJU potential. The LR could reach from SJU to SCL, GIG, GRU, EZE, as well as to a bit of west Africa, and also all the way to LAX (or LGB?). Of course, the question is if SJU has interest for any of those.
Lastly, there's always that JFK-ANC-NRT idea of mine...
If these don't work out, they're still 321's.
While Europe is sort of the obvious answer, I'm rather curious of what Latin America potential there could be from FLL with the 321LR that a simple Neo wouldn't cover. Only things that come to mind are REC and BSB. I wouldn't put much hope in either of those given that they're being cut by AA and DL respectively. Everything else is either out of reach of the LR or within reach of a normal Neo.
Aside from that, I do wonder if there could be SJU potential. The LR could reach from SJU to SCL, GIG, GRU, EZE, as well as to a bit of west Africa, and also all the way to LAX (or LGB?). Of course, the question is if SJU has interest for any of those.
Lastly, there's always that JFK-ANC-NRT idea of mine...
If these don't work out, they're still 321's.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting S75752 (Reply 23): If it doesn't work out, then they still have 321 equivalents they can just put on domestic routes, probably with a Mint configuration all ready to go. |
Unless I'm mistaken, an A321neoLR can be reconfigured as a regular A321neo. I know this is an option on the A359LR, but I'm sure it also applies to the A321.
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 24): Unless I'm mistaken, an A321neoLR can be reconfigured as a regular A321neo. I know this is an option on the A359LR, but I'm sure it also applies to the A321. |
I forget what some of the main differences between the Neo and LR are. All I remember is the Engine, and some modifications to the wing structure, what else is there?
-
-
lightsaber
Moderator
- Posts: 24641
- Joined:
RE: B6 CEO Reaffirms Interest In A321LR
| Quoting parapente (Reply 10): As a Brit who knows nothing about the Airline.Is there a reason Jet Blue does not connect with major destinations in Canada? |
Neeleman, the founder of JetBlue was an executive of Weather. His contract prohibited direct competition. While I doubt that provision still holds, B6 missed a more profitable window to enter the market.
| Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 24): Unless I'm mistaken, an A321neoLR can be reconfigured as a regular A321neo |
Yes. The airline could leave in some of the added plumbing (capped) and just take out the third ACT (cargo hold fuel tank) and it is an A321NEO. A very low cost and low risk option.
Lightsaber
-
- CaribClipper
- Posts: 61
- Joined:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 777222A, AC4500, AKL321NX, aloha73g, babcock, December17, Elgorou, flyoregon, Frontier14, hyd09l27r, Internaute, jashah, JetAirways, jetlagchad, jrfspa320, northwest_guy, Osubuckeyes, PhilInBRN, ramprat320, RollerRB211, Sevoair, SkyEye350, slick1017, standbyguy, Tolbs, wacgocrazy, winter, Ytraveller and 192 guests